On Sat 07 Sep 2013 11:53:00 AM EDT, S.Kemter wrote: > Now there are some voices, that say doing a second page if you have > selected to much isnt the best way. Jenneh and I talked about this in IRC a couple of weeks ago and I had thought we were in agreement that the two-step process is really not the best way. The core problem with the two-step method is that you're setting the user up to enter into an error condition. The max number of votes is not enforced in the selection mechanism, so you're setting a trap for the user to select more wallpapers than you allow, and then basically telling them on the second screen that they are wrong. Avoiding placing the user into an error condition is one of those key heuristics of interface design you don't ever want to violate. Plus, having a 'vote' button on the first screen makes it seem as if you're entering in your final vote. Some people might hit vote, then go somewhere else, and not realize until their session has timed out that their vote didn't actually go through. (You could probably address this by relabeling the button, "Review Selections" or something like this. But that's confusing too. I made my selections, why are you forcing me to review them? Having a selection preview in the same page as your voting eliminates this extraneous step and also visually makes clear the user's state (votes left, no votes left). Having the second step is also inconsistent in that if you select exactly 16 wallpapers, you'll never hit that screen, right? If the point is to give people a place to further refine over their selections, that needs to be advertised much better otherwise there are users who will never hit it and get that benefit. (This would then re-spin the 'error condition' into being a 'feature') > Well I am more in favor of it as I > can do in this way sorting first out all the stuff that isnt really > good and then select the ones I really think that are the best. > Thinking thats the best way with a huge amount of submissions, we will > have this time I think something around 100 submissions but with > Nuancier running for the next one, I think the submissions will > definitely increase as a lot of people have no problems anymore with > submitting to the wiki and need no account anymore. > > Now, we could try to do something most of us can agree or we can use > what we have now and try what the users think about and change it > later as we concentrate right now only on the voting and all the > others things will be written later. > > So what you think sticking with it like it is now or try to improve it? I think no matter which design we ultimately choose, the state it's in now definitely needs refinement. At the very least, if it's to stay using the same two-step model, I think: - The "Vote" button on the first screen needs to be relabeled. I suggest "Finalize Selections" or "Finalize Vote." Or even "Step 2: Refine Selections" - The first page should say something like, "Click on as many of the wallpapers as you like below. You'll finalize your selections in the next step." And if the user happens to pick 16 exactly, how would you treat step 2? I don't even know... because then they're putting in a real vote, not finalizing their selection. Maybe the text of the button changes depending on the state? So if you pick exactly 16 it says "Vote" but if you pick more than 16 it says "Refine Selections" ?? But buttons changing labels is confusing too... It seems like the problem you're wanting to be solved is: within a massive number of images, how can you pick within your limit when you like more wallpapers than the limit allows and you're not sure which should make it? The thing is, the mockup Ryan did solves this problem - your selections are always viewable on the screen. If they aren't when you scroll, they should be - the pane should be fixed. It's basically like having the second page viewable on the first page. The other thing in Ryan's design which makes the selection task easier is that he mocked it up with only 5 selections allowed. Limiting the wallpaper selection to 5 means people are only going to pick those wallpapers they are the very most excited about, and it's going to be easier for them to pick them because they don't have as many slots to worry about. You might worry that letting people pick 5 means we won't have enough wallpapers voted for to make 16 for the package, but if we have > 100 wallpapers to choose from, the probability that our users would pick the same 5 over and over is really low. The more wallpapers, the lower the probability. 16 selections is a pretty high cognitive load. ~m _______________________________________________ design-team mailing list design-team@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
